President-elect Ma Ying-jeou said yesterday that he supports reopening the [partisan kangaroo court investigation that would "prove" President Chen Shui-bian's election in 2004 was invalid, because he "faked" an assassination attempt upon his life in order to win sympathy votes. The pieces fit together PERFECTLY - really, they do!]

Bet the Taiwanese electorate will be positively thrilled to watch the KMT hard at work, fulfilling all those sincere campaign pledges to FOCUS LIKE A LASERBEAM on the economy.

No, no - that's not a scoop from hostile newspapers.
That's the glowing message from SYMPATHETIC media organs:

Seventeen of [Ma Ying-jeou's] classmates at the former affiliated elementary
school of the provincial Taipei Girls' Normal School were present at the
morning [class reunion] party, where they reminisced about Ma, the discipline enforcer
of the class.

"He was a strict disciplinarian," one classmate pointed out.

[...]

All his classmates present at the [recent class reunion] addressed Ma as
"Our Classmate the President," though he continued to serve as their
discipline enforcer.

Ma called the roll. Everyone had to answer "Here." Then he led
everyone in singing the school anthem. He never hesitated to point an accusing
finger at anyone who didn't open his mouth wide enough to sing.

When the former classmates jostled against each other to get an autograph,
Ma the disciplinarian ordered them to line up for a group picture first.
"Picture first, then the autograph," Ma commanded. Everybody obeyed.

Don't think I've ever heard the words, "strict disciplinarian,"
used as a compliment before. There's something a bit repulsive about rosily
portraying the officious behavior of a bossy 6 year-old.

Remember how the KMT threatened to sic John Law after Theresa Shaheen when it looked like she might deliver some unwelcome news about the validity of Ma Ying-jeou's old American green card?

Theresa Shaheen, former chairwoman of the American Institute in Taiwan, is being
given a...warning against getting involved in the "green card" issue over
Kuomintang presidential hopeful Ma Ying-jeou.

"We wish Ms. Shaheen to know that it's unlawful for an foreign national to
get involved in an election in Taiwan," a top aide to Ma said yesterday.
According to the Election Law, no foreign nationals may electioneer for a
candidate in Taiwan.

Well, I was just throwing out old newspapers around here, when I happened to run across this:

Meanwhile, Ma's campaign team invited a US immigration lawyer to support the
candidate's claim that it was not necessary to complete an I-407 form to give up
one's green card.

Query: I wonder if Ma's aides issued similar threats to the U.S. immigration lawyer whom they invited to speak on their candidate's behalf? I mean, you can't graduate with an S.J.D. in Law from Harvard like Ma did, and not believe in the sacred principle of equality before the law, can you?

UPDATE (Mar 31/08): Therese Shaheen denies the KMT story that she was ever willing to wade into the green card controversy:

In her statement, in English and Chinese, Shaheen said she was "never
involved in any matters" regarding the green card issue during the presidential
campaign.

"Fantastic rumors about my alleged involvement, my plans to make public
statements about it, and the allegation that I was doing so because I favored
one party over the other were 100 percent false," she said.

"The Olympics are a force for good." Not always! The 1936 Olympics, held in Nazi Germany, were an astonishing propaganda coup for Hitler. It's true that the star performance of Jesse Owens, the black American track-and-field great, did shoot
some holes in the Nazi theory of Aryan racial superiority. But Hitler still got
what he wanted out of the Games. With the help of American newspapers such as
the New York Times, which opined that the Games put Germany "back in the family of nations again," he convinced many
Germans, and many foreigners, to accept Nazism as "normal." The Nuremburg laws were in force, German troops had marched into the
Rhineland, Dachau was full of prisoners, but the world cheered its athletes
in Berlin. As a result, many people, both in and out of Germany,
reckoned that everything was just fine and that Hitler could be tolerated a bit
longer.

Taipei City Hall prepares a delegation for a big Beijing pow-wowkowtow for a couple of pandas. No word yet as to whether Taipei will offer sanctuary to members of that other rare Chinese species, the endangered saffron-robed Tibetan monk.

The Foreigner wants to know: couldn't these "One China"-obsessed pols at least have had the decency to wait until AFTER the blood had dried in the streets of Shangri-La?

Used to be a really big fan, so it's sad to see she's fallen under the spell of Taiwan's saviour, its sainted Ma-ssiah:

His name is Ma Ying-jeou, and he is almost too good to be true. Fifty-seven years old, he is a handsome man of vigor and intelligence who as a child mastered Chinese classics and calligraphy, who holds a doctorate of juridical science from Harvard University (1981), and who is the head of Chiang's old Kuomintang, or Nationalist Party.

Well, it IS almost too good to be true that Ma was elected president - too good to be true for China, that is. Especially after "little elder brother" labored so mightily to block the special arms bill for weapons that were intended for the defense of Taiwan from Beijing's predations. How obediently Ma danced to China's tune, blocking that bill around sixty times over a two year period!

Asked about the fate of Taiwan's companies in China in the case of a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan, he answered sagely, "Actually, if more Taiwan companies are investing in coastal China, I doubt very much the Chinese could attack -- their missiles would be threatening their own companies."

Somewhere in that sagely response, Ma obviously forgot to mention that outright confiscation of private property is something that would never, ever, EVER occur to leaders of China's COMMUNIST party. Why, it's just INCONCEIVABLE that the acolytes of Lenin or Mao would do such a thing to equipment and capital belonging to citizens of an ENEMY COUNTRY. During WARTIME.

Maybe Ma's right - if you can't trust Marxists to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules, who CAN you trust?

If I remember correctly, the KMT spent much of last fall hammering
the Chen administration for not doing more to rein in high fuel and
food prices. Later, during February of this year, KMT presidential candidate Ma
Ying-jeou promised SUBSIDIZED fuel for Taiwanese fishermen.
And it was just March 10th - eleven days before the presidential
election - that KMT lawmakers DEMANDED that Taiwan's Ministry of
Economic Affairs maintain price controls on gas and utilities:

"We want [Minister of Economic Affairs] Steve Chen to declare he will continue the price freezes until after
April 1," one concerned Kuomintang lawmaker said. [emphasis added]

Other legislators joined in calling on Steve Chen to keep the freeze in place
until after a new president is sworn in.

Ah, how the worm turns. By March 25th, all those price freezes suddenly didn't look so attractive to the KMT anymore.
Because if those prices are unfrozen later, as they eventually must be,
their newly-elected man Ma will take the heat. Much better that those
prices go up NOW, so lame-duck Chen Shui-bian can shoulder all the
blame:

Premier Chang Chun-hsiung (張俊雄) yesterday defended the Cabinet's decision to
maintain a freeze on the prices of water, electricity, liquefied petroleum gas
and fuel oil until the new government is inaugurated on May 20.

Chang denounced criticism from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators at
a legislative question-and-answer session that the Cabinet had made the decision
in order to leave an "awful mess" for the KMT following the handover.

"I cannot accept being accused of leaving an `awful mess' behind. Amid
soaring commodity prices, the difficulties that people face in making a living
is the most serious problem the government needs to deal with," Chang said when
approached for comment outside the legislature.

What
we can see clearly here is that within a scant 14 days, the KMT went
from being the enthusiastic advocate of price controls to the laissez-faire party of
free-floating prices. First they demagogued the cost of living issue, frightening the Chen administration into implementing price caps. Then they bragged about how efficient former KMT dictator Chiang Ching-kuo's price controls were back in the economic glory days of the seventies. And just a few days prior to the presidential that they insisted the government maintain price freezes - only to demand the opposite three days AFTER the election.

How fortunate for Taiwan that the KMT's opposition to price controls is so well
grounded in principles, rather than low political expediency!

Saw the protests on CNN last night. Almost made me wish Taiwan HAD let itself be a part of the torch relay. Mighta made for one helluva show!

The network also featured the efforts of Tibetans to form their own alternative "Tibetan Olympics." Kind of a slapdash affair, it looks like. Nevertheless, if Western governments really want to rebuke Beijing, they might want to forget about the whole boycott thing and instead send a few athletes to the Tibetan Olympics as well.

And if Beijing objects? Hey, just innocently remind them of their own mantra: international athletics should always be kept non-political...

Found this one on Ezra Levant's blog - apparently a 15 year-old Tibetan teenager protesting outside a Chinese consulate in the Great White North climbed over a fence and was held for 45 minutes before police arrived:

“[The Chinese security staff] blew smoke in his face..."

Sorry, but I'm not hyperventilating yet.

"...and he was ordered to sign a letter apologizing..."

Doesn't say he actually SIGNED the confession.

"...they handcuffed him and twisted his hands..."

OK, now I'd call that possible torture territory. But surely the self-proclaimed keepers of 5000 years of Chinese civilization and culture wouldn't stoop so low as ... sexual molestation of a minor?

"...they tore apart his pants.”

Lovely. Wonder if anyone has stopped to ask former KMT chairman Lien Chan of Taiwan if he approves of the Chinese crackdown. (Lien, for those who don't remember, is the Taiwanese politician who pledged to join hands with the Communist Party of China in order to oppose "splittism.")

A day before the election, his surrogates threaten an American national, Theresa Shaheen, for offering to make clear whether Ma still has an American green card:

Theresa Shaheen, former chairwoman of the American Institute in Taiwan, is being
given a...warning against getting involved in the "green card" issue over
Kuomintang presidential hopeful Ma Ying-jeou.

"We wish Ms. Shaheen to know that it's unlawful for an foreign national to get
involved in an election in Taiwan," a top aide to Ma said yesterday. According
to the Election Law, no foreign nationals may electioneer for a candidate in
Taiwan.

Interestingly enough, the Ma campaign was more than happy enough to quote "unnamed sources in America" who said their candidate had nothing to worry about - his green card was no longer valid. But give one of those sources a verifiable name and face (along with an answer Ma doesn't like), and suddenly his attack dogs come out snarling.

(By the way, the whole "Is Ma's green card still valid or isn't it?" controversy was profoundly uninteresting to me. If anything, the fact that Ma considered emigrating from Taiwan when it was still a dictatorship in the '70s inclines me to think more, not less of him!)

UPDATE (Mar 31/08): Therese Shaheen denies the KMT story that she was ever willing to wade into the green card controversy:

In her statement, in English and Chinese, Shaheen said she was "never
involved in any matters" regarding the green card issue during the presidential
campaign.

"Fantastic rumors about my alleged involvement, my plans to make public
statements about it, and the allegation that I was doing so because I favored
one party over the other were 100 percent false," she said.

...there is nothing "terrible" if one party controls both the legislative and executive branches of government. Nothing terrible has happened in Singapore after the ruling PAP's (People Action Party) established one-party dominance. In fact, Singapore is the envy of the developing world, just as Taiwan once was.

It would be only too easy to rattle off a list of one-party states that subsequently became hells-on-earth. Funny how president-elect Ma Ying-jeou never mentioned this little scheme in front of the electorate. But then I guess he's clever enough to realize proposing a soft dictatorship BEFORE the polls open might not have gone down so well with the voting public.

As a matter of fact, DPP city councilors of Taipei made a similar on-the-spot
check on the Ma campaign headquarters on March 4.

There was no confrontation, however.

The March 5th Taipei Times and China Post's archives have no mention of this (at least, after a cursory check), but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Still, I have a few questions about this supposed inspection. Answers to the following might help us decide how similar the two cases really are:

Did the DPP city councilors on the 4th enter Ma's KMT campaign headquarters alone, or as part of a bi-partisan group composed of KMT city councilors as well? The March 12th "investigators" belonged to one party only (the KMT).

Did the DPP city councilors on March 4th visit Ma's campaign offices as part of an expected, pre-scheduled inspection, or was it a snap inspection? Alex Fei and his merry band showed up completely unannounced on March 12th.

Did the DPP city councilors pretend to be fire safety inspectors on their March 4th inspection, as the KMT legislators did during their "inspection" on the 12th?

Were the DPP city councilors asked to leave by security guards, and did they comply? When asked to vacate the premises, the KMT legislators on the 12th elected not to do so.

Did the DPP city councilors on March 4th try to enter Ma Ying-jeou's office unattended, which would have allowed them to rifle through campaign documents and troll through his computer systems? Depending on the version of March 12th's events, the KMT legislators tried to (or actually DID) exactly that.

I find it amusing that the China Post attempts to spin the attempted theft of independence party documents as nothing more than a run-of-the-mill inspection. If the inspection was so routine, why does the China Post contradict itself by saying it was 'inane'? Because if the check was as completely proper and ordinary as the China Post insinuates, then the KMT legislators cannot be accused of 'inanity' - they were simply doing their jobs. Ma Ying-jeou should never have apologized then, for blame would belong solely to the rioters: rioters who interfered with a lawful, proper, everyday inspection.

But if there's something not-quite-kosher about the KMT's March 12th "inspection" - as the Post concedes by calling it 'inane' - then bringing up cases of inspections that WERE lawful, proper and ordinary serves only to muddy the waters around the issue.

Postscript: Of course, muddying the waters is one of the China Post's specialties. Perhaps the most blatant example of this is when columnist and editorial writer Joe Hung tries to persuade foreign readers that the 2004 shooting of President Chen Shui-bian was staged. How is it possible, he asks, that President Chen was shot when not a SINGLE spectator at the campaign parade heard the the gunshot?

Now, any foreign reader has got to see that and think, "Wow, that certainly DOES sound mysterious." But what the average foreign reader DOESN'T know (and any damn fool living in Taiwan IS aware of) is that the shooting took place at a campaign parade where there were HUNDREDS of big, noisy-ass FIRECRACKERS blowing up. Blowing up left, right and center. Pretty hard to hear one or two gunshots in that environment, as Hung is well aware.

To be blunt then: Joe Hung has a major credibility problem. So that's why I'm from Missouri when he tells us the March 4th and the March 12th inspections were somehow similar.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman John Kuan (關中)
yesterday dismissed Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) accusations that he had
bribed voters, vowing to commit suicide if the rival party could back its
claims.

[...]

"I will accept my punishment and commit seppuku at the party's
headquarters if they can present evidence that I have bribed others," Guan told
a press conference at KMT headquarters. "The two legislators should also end
their lives if they cannot prove their allegations."

Seppuku refers to the Japanese ritual of committing suicide by
disembowelment.

First Alex Fai, now this guy. Well, I actually DO remember Ma Ying-jeou's father made a similar threat a few years ago. Don't recall this case, although I probably wasn't paying attention at the time:

Many also remember that last October, a Central Election Commission member
recommended by the People First Party, Chao Shu-chien (趙叔鍵),
also offered to commit seppuku "to defend the dignity of an academic" if
the commission voted on whether the two planned referendums should be held
alongside the January legislative election.

Sunday's Taipei Times has a piece on how all of this trivializes the issue of suicide, and of course I'm not going to argue with that. But the frequency of these threats recently causes me to wonder: Is this a part of traditional Chinese political culture, or a part of Japanese culture that was grafted on locally? Is there some kind of significance to the fact that members of the KMT and People First Party should specifically threaten seppuku, when both those political parties tend to feel an abhorrence of all things Japanese? And lastly, have there been any cases in Taiwan within living memory where someone has actually followed through?

UPDATE (Mar 17/08): Last night, I tried to imagine how we would react to this kind of ploy in the West. First of all, I'm pretty certain we'd consider the politician completely nuts. Beyond that though, mental health professionals would probably be given air time to voice their disapproval. Support groups for families of suicide victims would be apoplectic. People whose lives had been affected by suicide would write angry (or distraught) letters - and the politician would be forced to apologize.

That that doesn't happen here is interesting. Different cultural attitudes towards suicide, perhaps? Or is it that civil society is weaker here, so the type of pressure I've outlined simply isn't brought to bear?

On Wednesday, Liao Shu-hsin (廖述炘), the director of a pro-independence
underground radio station in Taipei, allegedly immolated himself in his grief
over the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) loss in the presidential election.
Liao reportedly felt that his dream of seeing a “Republic of Taiwan” established
was no longer possible.

UPDATE (Apr 5/08): More on the sad case of Liao Shu-hsin in today's Taipei Times.

Widow: Ehhh? You want to see my JEWELRY? Because it might start a FIRE?

Alex Fai: Don't be alarmed; it's all on the up and up. Really.
Haven't you heard of me? I'm Alex Fai, legislator. Or should I say, legislator - AND
fire safety inspector. Well, part-time fire safety inspector. Fire safety checks are kind of a thing I like to do in my spare time... When I'm not in the legislature. You know - legislating.

Widow: This sounds pretty fishy to me...

Alex Fai: No, no, it's all perfectly standard. In addition,
the legislature has authorized me to carry out a non-fire safety
related inspection of your home as well. Inspection of a public place, we call it.

Widow(indignantly): Public place? Why, this is MY home!

Alex Fai: Well, it is, and it isn't, if you get my drift.
You see, YOU own a mortgage, and that mortgage is held by a BANK. The BANK'S operations are overseen by the FINANCE COMMITTEE, of which I,
Alex Fai, am a member. Ergo, your house, from a certain point of view (and by "a certain" I mean "my") is therefore public property. We lawmakers can't be barred from
conducting inspections of public property - that's the law.

Ow, ow! Stop hitting me around the ears with that cane! Do you
have any idea who you're messing with? I'm a KMT lawmaker in the ROC
legislature! We've got a 75% majority! I'll sue you for violating my personal liberty! And interfering with a legislator's lawful inspections! And, and...

Oh, thank goodness you came just in time, officers. Ha, ha, no,
there's no need to book me and take me in for fingerprinting. And don't you go listening to anything this sweet, little old adle-pated lady says, either.
Because as you can see from my ID, I'm Alex Fai, KMT legislator.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(Disclaimer:
Neither Alex Fai nor The Foreigner can guarantee that users of this
technique will not suffer bodily harm or incarceration. Actual
results may vary.)

As for Taiwan's younger generation, the ones for whom Tiananmen
Square is ancient history, current events must be a bit of an
eye-opener. We're all children of the Yellow Emperor, the KMT propaganda machine tirelessly drummed into their heads...

And that he'll commit suicide if Ma Ying-jeou loses the Taiwanese presidential election on his account.

Only thing is, it was only two and half days ago that Mr. Fai tried to get past security guards by claiming he was some big hot-shot fire safety inspector. (Which isn't bad: he COULD have said he was Art Vandelay, the architect. But then, he would have had to forgo his life-long dream of impersonating a fire safety inspector!)

With a record of honesty like this, why would anyone believe anything this guy says now?

...if we approach political theory from a different angle, then we find that far from solving any fundamental problem, we have merely skipped over them, by assuming that the question 'Who should rule?' is fundamental. For even those who share this assumption of Plato's admit that political rulers are not always sufficiently 'good' or 'wise' (we need not worry about the precise meaning of these terms), and that it is not at all easy to get a government on whose goodness and wisdom one can implicitly rely. If that is granted, then we must ask whether political thought should not face from the beginning the possibility of bad government; whether we should not prepare for the worst leaders, and hope for the best. But this leads to a new approach to the problem of politics, for it forces us to replace the question: Who should rule? by the new question: How can we so organize political institutions that bad or incompetent rulers can be prevented from doing too much damage? [emphasis added]

- Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Book 1: The Spell of Plato, p 120-121

Readers are free to agree with Popper on this one, or they're free to agree with Dr. William Fang of the China Post, who breezily dismisses considerations of governmental checks and balances as nothing more than "the balance of power fallacy." It must dismay Fang to learn that KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou himself has become a recent convert to Popper's point of view, now that his campaign has taken a broadside from public opinion due to the recent attempt by KMT legislators to steal campaign documents from Ma's opponent. Saturday's Taiwan News describes Ma's sudden epiphany:

[Ma] reiterated that the incident stemmed from the legislators having confused their roles as lawmakers with that of law enforcers. The KMT has the advantage of holding three fourths of the seats in the Legislature, but party lawmakers should exercise more self-restraint in carrying out their legislative duties...

Ma vowed that if he is elected president, he will push for political reforms to make sure there was no recurrence of the confusion between lawmaking and executive power.

"I am supported by strong public opinion - anyone who opposes or resists reforms will immediately become a subject of reform themselves," Ma said.

That's rich. Ma's gonna twist arms and make the 81 Tyrants voluntarily enact curbs upon the nearly-unrestricted power that they currently enjoy - or believe they're entitled to.

Opposition Kuomintang presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou yesterday bowed three times to apologize for the sixth time to his rival Frank Hsieh, his supporters, and [to society], in a gesture seen as damage control after four KMT legislators intruded into Hsieh's campaign headquarters on Wednesday.

The reason for the multiple apologies was that four legislators from Ma's party - Alex Fei, Chen Chieh, Lo Ming-tsai and Luo Shu-lei - all tried to steal documents from Hsieh's official campaign office. Ten days before Taiwan's presidential election. And they got caught. And all hell subsequently broke loose.

Apologies are of course in order from Ma, but the Taiwan News' headline reminded me of a Joe Hung column in the China Post from a couple years back, where he implied Chen Shui-bian was an unfit president simply because he said he was sorry TOO FREQUENTLY:

President Chen Shui-bian is the most apologetic chief of state in Taiwan's
brief annals of democratic government -- and probably in world history as well.

He has apologized ten times in the six years of his
presidency.

Hey Joe, your man Ma's not doing too shabby himself, what with 6 apologies in two and half DAYS. That's gotta be some kinda record too, doncha think?

If it isn't, never fear: there's still seven days left till voters here go to the polls. All Ma needs to do is average 0.6 apologies per day, and he'll have achieved in a mere ten days what took Chen Shui-bian six long YEARS to accomplish.

"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail, its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter, the rain may enter - but the King of England cannot enter; all his forces dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement."

- Pitt the elder

"Look around. Turn the dump upside down if you want to. I won't squawk - IF you've got a search warrant."

At approximately 4:30 p.m., KMT lawmakers Fei Hung-tai, Chen Chieh, Lo
Ming-tsai and Lo Shu-lei of the Legislature's financial affairs committee,
literally dragged Finance Minister Ho Chih-chih and the president of the First
Financial Holding Company to the DPP candidate's "Taiwan Renewal" campaign
headquarters and, heedless of the protests of security guards, rushed into the
building and attempted to enter the personal office of the DPP [presidential] candidate.

The legislators apparently tried to bluster their way past the guards by alternately claiming they were "inspecting a public place"* or were carrying out a "fire safety inspection." Inspecting a public place? That'd be lie #1. Once somebody rents a property, it's no longer public by any stretch of the imagination. Period. As for the whole fire safety inspection line, I took the liberty of googling "fire safety inspection certification" on the web. In Florida at least, certification entails 200 hours of training plus the passing of a written exam. Yes, Florida is Florida, and Taiwan is Taiwan, so the requirements may be somewhat different. Still, I'd be most surprised to learn that these illustrious legislators had the certification to conduct fire safety inspections, to say nothing of local fire department authorization to conduct an inspection on that particular day, in that particular locale.

The China Post provides a vivid image of what happened next:

When the group took an elevator to the 13th floor...the DPP staff cut off the power supply, trapping them inside.

(Threepio! Shut down all the garbage mashers on the detention level! Shut down all the garbage mashers on the detention level!)

The Taiwan News adds that the novice fire inspectors were stuck in the elevator for almost 40 minutes, and its account continues:

All four were eventually escorted out of the building by police called by
Hsieh office staff and, surrounded by Hsieh supporters, the three were pushed
into a police car, while Lo, the son of noted gangster and former legislator Lo
Fu-chu, fled the scene.

The incident sparked a two-and-a-half hour confrontation as Hsieh's staff,
volunteers and supporters blocked police from allowing the police cars from
leaving with "suspects caught in the act of committing a crime" until a Taipei
District Court prosecutor arrived to take a disposition and accept charges from
the Hsieh camp.

In their statement to police, the group justified their actions by claiming to be investigating allegations that
the First Commercial Bank had rented office space to Hsieh's campaign at
below-market rates. Of course, had the merry band's "investigation" succeeded, they would have been privy to confidential campaign information belonging to their political opponent, so some might be tempted to take
their alibi with a grain of salt. At any rate, the Taiwan News correctly points out that allegations of this
nature merit a letter of complaint to the appropriate prosecutor's
office, not vigilante action:

The KMT lawmakers said their action was based on "information" that the Hsieh
headquarters was "illegally" using a floor of the 13-floor building, but we
believe that there can be no justification whatsoever for the KMT legislators to
take the law into their own hands and attempt literally to break into the
headquarters office of a presidential candidate of a rival party.

In the history of elections in Taiwan, yesterday's incident marked the first
time that staff from one party had attempted to openly enter without permission
the offices of another presidential candidate.

I know it's a cliche, but I still can't resist saying it: What did KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou know, and when did he know it?

* Inexplicably, a link to the China Post's article on the subject, titled, "First melee erupts in run-up to polls," is nowhere to be found on its website. Now c'mon, that was a front page, above-the-fold story!

UPDATE: I'm being a bit mean asking the old Watergate question of Ma, because after all, he DID apologize, in a manner of speaking. It was one of those everybody's-in-the-wrong-so-no-one's-really-to-blame deals:

Speaking in Chiayi yesterday, Ma expressed "regret" over the incident and censored the Hsieh camp [!] for "violence".

That's something to look forward to, isn't it? If Ma Ying-jeou wins, I mean. Four years of Milk-Toast Ma doing nothing but apologizing, over and over again, for the extremism of power-drunk KMT parliamentarians.

UPDATE #2: Many thanks to Tim Maddog for finding the link to the China Post story. The link's been added to the post.

Anyone remember the KMT's whining and moaning when the Chiang Kai-shek airport was renamed Taipei-Taoyuan International? Just think of the staggering expense, they kvetched. Signs have to be replaced. New letterhead needs to be re-ordered. Staff will have to throw out all those preprinted envelopes.

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

Well, lo and behold, the same KMT that claims the economy's in the dumper is now demanding the referendums on joining the U.N. be held independently of the presidential election. And they're threatening to old their breath until they turn bluecall on their voters to boycott the referendums if they don't get their way.

Would it be unfair to point out that holding the referendum on a separate day would cost mucho dinero? Whatever could have happened to all those virtuous KMT penny-pinchers? After all, under their party's proposal, voting halls would have to be rented - a second time. Election workers would have to volunteer their time - again. And economic production would fall, because voters would have to take time off work - yet again.

It'd be most instructive to see estimates as to how much Taiwan's 81 Tyrants plan to squander in this cynical ploy to see the referendums fail for lack of sufficient turnout.*---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------* By law, a 50% voter turnout is required for the U.N. referendums to be valid. A party that was genuinely interested in seeing the referendums pass would be happy to have them held on the same day as the presidential election, since voter turnout during Taiwanese presidential elections tends to be higher than for other kinds of election.

Rather comical to watch KMT candidates bend over backwards for China...and then hop up and down angrily while denouncing political rivals for "making them wear the red hat".

Here's a little tip fellas: Those crimson chapeaus - you donned 'em all by yourselves. So you look pretty ridiculous turning around now and complaining that independence supporters are the ones who somehow forced you to put 'em on.

A good example of what I'm talking about is KMT vice-presidential candidate Vincent Siew's indignation that his "cross-strait" common market proposal is being mis-characterized as a "One China" common market.

You're making me wear the red hat, protested Siew. I never, ever, EVER said I wanted a "One China" common market! What I want is a "cross-strait" common market. Those are two COMPLETELY different animals. And anyways, how DARE you question my patriotism?

All the semantic hair-splitting came to an end a few days later, when Siew was forced to sheepishly admit that yes, he had indeed called for the establishment of a "Greater China" market during a speech in 2005. Sticking to his guns though, Siew continued to defend the general idea:

"China is the reason behind Taiwan's marginalization in the international
economic market. The cross-strait common market would maximize opportunities and
minimize the threat," [Siew] said. [emphasis added]

Jaws should drop when people hear that, because Siew casually acknowledges here that China is currently engaged in low-intensity economic warfare against Taiwan. And that Taiwan should REWARD Beijing for doing so!

(For those unaware of the situation, Taiwan has been attempting to sign free-trade deals with other countries for a few years now. Behind the scenes however, Beijing wrenches arms out of their sockets to prevent those negotiations from ever going anywhere.)

Just what is Vincent Siew's response to this decidedly unfriendly behavior? Does he breathe a single word of condemnation about it? Or, better still, as a candidate for the vice-presidency, does he offer any practical suggestions as to how Taiwan can break through the economic isolation brought on by China's unrelenting hostility?

Nope. Siew's panacea is, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. When China walks all over Taiwan, the proper response isn't complaint or resistance. No, no - China must instead be EMBRACED for its acts of malice. Battered wife syndrome isn't a vice or some kind of pitiful disease - it's actually a species of virtue. Siew reasons that if Taiwan goes to Beijing on its knees and begs for a small place in the Greater China Co-Prosperity Sphere, the Communist Party of China will finally know once and for all just how much the Taiwanese truly love them. And Beijing shall henceforth be moved towards charitable benevolence.

Such child-like faith in the universality of human kindness. Perhaps instead of complaining about that red hat of his, Siew should consider pulling it from over his eyes.

Postscript: A terrific editorial on the subject from Wednesday's Taiwan News. One particular paragraph deals with the point I attempted to make:

Ma's claims that his future government would ban PRC produce and workers also
fly in the face of the reciprocal nature of trade and economic pacts and rest
entirely on Beijing's "goodwill" to allow Taiwan to erect barriers against PRC
dumping of "black heart" defective and dangerous foods and products.

Difficult to see how Taiwan could count on China's goodwill in such an arrangement, given that Beijing's ILL-WILL is the explicitly-stated reason this proposal was mooted in the first place!